Kozak v. Struth

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “expert testimony must be carefully scrutinized because issues...of credibility are for the jury, not the expert.”
• prohibiting expert testimony on causation and due care because issues of ultimate fact, especially those of credibility, are for jury, not expert
• prohibiting expert testimony on causation and due care because issues of ultimate fact, especially those of credibility, are for jury, not expert
• requiring the disclosure of facts used by an expert in forming an opinion
• expert opinion based upon the totality of conflicting evidence usurped jury’s function
• expert opinion based upon the totality of conflicting evidence usurped jury's function

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).